Last night's parent-led Mayoral forum: how did the candidates do on the hot-button issues?

UPDATED:  Here are scanned copies of the signed pledges of each of the candidates, responding whether they would support each one of our demands.  If the next mayor is one of these individuals, you can be sure we will hold them to their promises! Sal Albanese (D), Adolpho Carrion Jr  (I), Bill de Blasio  (D), Anthony Gronowicz (G),  John Liu (D), Erick Salgado (D),  Bill Thompson (D)

The parent-led mayoral forum last night at Murry Bergtraum High School was terrific, with parents asking incisive yes/no questions, investigative reporter Juan Gonzalez doing inspired follow-up as only he knows how, and all the candidates giving thoughtful responses.  Below is the livestream video; we will have sharper video uploaded next week, but the audio is quite clear.

The coalition of individuals and groups that put this together, which included Class Size Matters and NYC Kids PAC (the full list is on the flyer)   asked some very challenging questions, and developed a scorecard by which the responses of the candidates could be marked off yes or no.  Here is a pdf copy of the scorecard, with all the questions listed and how each of the candidates responded.
Or you can click on the images to the right and below. 

Carrion, Thompson and Liu came late and so didn't have a chance to answer all the questions, so they are marked "L" for those questions.  However, at the end of the forum, Juan Gonzalez requested that all the candidates to indicate their answers on their individual scorecards and sign them, so that we will have a record of what they promised to do should they be elected mayor.

An informal calculation made at the forum shows these results: Liu and Gronowicz got perfect scores  of 100%, Salgado 87%, Albanese 73%, de Blasio 60%, Carrion 50%, and Thompson 33%.  (I will update these scores when I receive copies of the signed responses from the candidates, hopefully with all the questions checked off one way or another. I will also post these documents here.)

The candidates whose names are crossed off did not attend.  Democrats Chris Quinn instead visited two Orthodox synagogues, Anthony Weiner did not show up though he had no competing campaign events on his schedule. Republicans Catsimitidis, Lhota, and McDonald also chose not to attend.

The highlight (for me): All the candidates promised to commit to specific class size reduction goals by the end of their first term, and if necessary, to raise revenue to meet them.  All the candidates also promised to stop sharing personal student information with inBloom and other corporations, without full parental notification and consent.

The most contentious issues -- predictably -- related to Mayoral control, governance and parent empowerment.  Only Liu, Gronowicz and Salgado agreed to give up three of their appointments on the Panel for Education Policy to representatives who would be elected by parents, though Thompson said he would give up two of his seats.  DeBlasio and Thompson also opposed giving Community Education Councils the authority to approve co-locations and school closings, though they said they would listen to CECs for advisory input.  (DeBlasio explains his position at about 31 min. in on the video.)

Another contentious issue related to require charter schools that are housed in DOE facilities to pay rent; Albanese, Carrion and Thompson said they would not require this. 
As to whether they would take away the school safety officers away from the jurisdiction of the police, Carrion, de Blasio, Salgado and Thompson were opposed. At about one hour into the video are explanations from de Blasio and Thompson about why they answered this way; Thompson said that police should still do the training though the principal should decide whether a student should be arrested.

But please watch the entire forum, and add your comments below.  There are many interesting issues covered, including additional questions asked by Juan not included on the scorecards.  For example, at 1:10 in, there is a discussion about the lack of diversity in the Bloomberg administration, as well as a critique of the decline of Black and Latino teachers in the public schools.




Video streaming by Ustream

Updated with video: mayoral debate with Weiner making his first appearance

The Weiner scrum (Credit:  @NYDNLemire)

Updated: now with video, excerpts of highlights below.

Despite the Anthony Weiner press hysteria, (it was his first appearance at a mayoral debate; Michael Powell of NYTimes tweeted "Cluster idiocy of press on full display at Weiner a thon educational debate") yesterday’s education forum hosted by New Yorkers for Great Public Schools was very interesting.   

Zakiyah Ansari did a great job moderating, and there were very good questions asked by parents and students.  Chris Quinn didn’t attend, though Zakiyah said the date of the debate had been changed twice to accommodate Quinn’s schedule.

Weiner stood out from the crowd not just because of the paparazzi scrum and excessive media attention; he was the only candidate to come through the audience and shake hands.  He was the only candidate to stand while answering questions, the only one to say no when asked if he would stop having safety agents under control of police rather than principals, and the only one against requiring arts in every school.  

Weiner was quite resistant to altering his stance on increasing the number of suspensions for unruly students, justifying that by saying we have the largest classes in 20 years (actually 14) which leads to more disruptions.  (Why not reduce class size instead?)

Credit: Daily News

There were several questions about Eva Moskowitz, director of Success Academy charter chain, as well as the hot-button issue of charter co-locations.  When asked if Eva gets unfair treatment by DOE, all said yes;  Weiner commented, ”I have no bloody idea…Uh, sure. … It seems to be the answer of the day.”

Liu and de Blasio were for giving Community Education Councils approval over co-locations; Weiner said more “community input” was needed in co-location decisions.  In underutilized schools, he suggested, why not put gifted program instead, or give the school a gym or science lab?   Thompson again called for a co-location “moratorium” (but for how long?)

They all cited the fact that either they had attended NYC public schools (Albanese, Liu, Thompson, Weiner), or their moms had been public school teachers (Thompson, Weiner), or they themselves had been teachers (Albanese), or their kids currently attended public schools.(Liu, de Blasio.)  They all were against the current over-emphasis on high stakes testing.  They all would fight for CFE funds from state.  They all were against closing schools rather than helping them improve.

While De Blasio and Liu said they would raise taxes on the wealthy to fund schools, Thompson was grilled on his pledge against raising taxes.  He responded he would cut contracts, consultants and wasted funds for networks “first.”  As someone who agrees there is tremendous waste in education spending, I don’t see that this would suffice, given the fact that school budgets have been cut to the bone and that teachers are looking for retroactive raises.

De Blasio said "Nothing will help our schools more than reducing class sizes," which begs the question of why he focuses instead on expanding preK and afterschool. 

Some new issues were brought up, not mentioned in previous debates: John Liu said he would bring back more bilingual programs, especially for older students who were new immigrants. Albanese said principals should be rated partly on how well they engage parents.   

When asked about improving special education, Liu said 25% of kids do not get their mandated services, and there should be a “balance” between inclusion and separate programs for special needs kids.  De Blasio said parents of students with disabilities get “treated like dirt.”  I didn’t hear a real solution, though, to the problems of special education from any of them. 

They all came out against the state and city plan to sharing personal student data with inBloom Inc. and for-profit vendors.  Afterwards, I asked Thompson if he would ask Merryl Tisch, his campaign chair and Regents head to pull out of inBloom, as she could stop it in a second.  He said he would. 

Here are some news links: NY Times, Daily News, WSJ, NY Post,  Huffington Post, NY Mag, City and State. GothamSchools has the audio; I’ll post the video as soon as it’s available.

Video of Mayoral forum, moderated by Diane Ravitch; and will Bill Thompson ask Merryl Tisch to stop the sharing of students' personal data with inBloom?

Here is video from the May 2 mayoral forum in Brooklyn, moderated by Diane Ravitch and sponsored by .  Candidates included John Liu, Bill Thompson, Bill de Blasio, and Sal Albanese.

Bill Thompson, candidate for Mayor

Parent Voices

It was an encouraging evening.  All said no more graded school report cards; all said in (a rather vague way) they would work for smaller classes.

Asked about whether they would expand charters and/or stop providing free space, Thompson said he would support a moratorium on co-locations and would focus on the million students on public schools; Albanese said that charter schools are a distraction and a way to attack organized labor. De Blasio used the issue to point out Quinn was not present, attacked Eva Moskowitz, and said he would start protecting existing schools rather than force co-locations on them.  Liu said that the deck was stacked in favor of charters because of their school population of fewer at-risk kids, and their extra funding. 

Merryl Tisch, Regents Chancellor and Thompson's campaign chair

He said, what kind of message are we sending to the public school children in the co-located building", that they are second class citizens?  (Unfortunately, none of them said if they would start charging charters rent.)

Best part of forum is is at 59.30 minutes in, when Diane asks whether they would pull out of the state and city plan to share private student information with inBloom Inc.  The audience, claps, and all the candidates vociferously respond, "absolutely not!"  Each of them point out the huge risks and conflicts of interest involved, especially as inBloom's operating system is being built by Wireless, run by former Chancellor Joel Klein, and owned by Murdoch's NewsCorp -- with a terrible record on privacy.

Thompson agrees that this is outrageous: "We are NOT going to release personal student information."  He mentions that when he was head of the Board of Education, the Police Department wanted personal student data turned over and he refused. "Will we turn this information over to inBloom, NO WE ARE NOT," he says vehemently.

Yet Bill Thompson's campaign chair is Merryl Tisch, who is 100% behind the inBloom plan as Chancellor of the New York State Board of Regents. New York is now the ONLY participant in this scheme that is going ahead with sharing personalized student data from the entire state, now that Louisiana, Georgia, Delaware, and Kentucky have pulled out.   If Merryl Tisch said no to inBloom, she could stop it in a dead second.

On Tuesday, there is a protest at Teacher's College graduation against awarding Tisch a special honor. Here is a letter from Celia Oyler, a TC professor about this; and an article by Fred Smith, a TC alumnus explaining why.  Tisch has supported high stakes testing, the evaluation of teachers by means of test scores, school closings, the expansion of charters, and now, the sharing of personal student data with private corporations without parental consent -- all policies opposite to Thompson's public positions.

At the very least, Thompson should ask Tisch to stop the inBloom project now.

The first mayoral debate on education!

This afternoon, the first debate on education among the mayoral candidates took place, hosted by Manhattan Media.  The candidates included two Bills, one Tom, one John and one Christine, absent Scott Stringer, given his announcement today that he will run for City Comptroller instead. 

The consensus among most of the observers I talked to afterwards is that the candidates did not distinguish themselves much from one another  on the hot-button issues.  Also, despite the best efforts of the moderators, Lindsey Christ of NY! And Philissa Cramer of GothamSchools, who tried to get them to be as specific as possible, given the limited time frame, there was a lot of ambiguity in their responses.  Below are the questions and answers, as best as I could record them:

Question: Would you select a Chancellor who is an educator, and would that person be from inside the DOE or outside the system?

Bill Thompson: Would choose an educator and someone outside the system; the “best of the best.”

Bill De Blasio: An educator, with a screening process that includes the public (how?).

Tom Allon: Would choose someone like the following individuals: former Deputy Chancellor Eric Nadelstern, Jennifer Raab, head of Hunter College, Linda Darling-Hammond professor at Stanford, or John White (formerly of DOE and now the controversial Louisiana education chief) .

John Liu: An educator, possibly from within the DOE.

Christine Quinn:  Would rule no one out, there are many great people inside DOE including principals, network people and Superintendents.  Jennifer Raab is a “fascinating” example, who was not an educator when appointed head of Hunter but has done an excellent job.

Question: The next mayor will probably have to negotiate a new contract with the UFT; would you push for merit pay and/or limit tenure?

DeBlasio: I want to compliment Cory Booker, who got an excellent contract for Newark teachers [I don’t think Booker had much to do with it]; he put incentives into system to get teachers to teach in high need subject areas like science.  As to tenure, there is “merit” in new state system; it’s a “wtep in the right direction”; he would partner with the union on improving the system.

Allon:  For merit pay, would establish a new “career” track; gives example of New American Academy which pays master teachers more. 50% attrition rates of teachers in 5 years a disgrace; he would weaken tenure (how that would improve attrition unclear).

Liu: There’s a reason for tenure:  teacher jobs were used by pols to give jobs to cronies etc.; tenure should be protected.  Merit pay; depends how you measure “merit”; in the current system there’s a 40-50% margin of error; first you need an evaluation system that makes sense.

Thompson: NYC tried merit pay before; it hasn’t worked, but he wouldn’t take it off the table.

Quinn: Newark contract should be model for nation; it was developed in a collaborative process ; gives extra pay to teachers to teach in tougher schools; would not support score-based merit pay; teachers do not go into profession for money. (So why would financial incentives work to attract them to high needs schools?)  Tenure: agrees with new state system that if you have a poor evaluation two years in a row, with mentoring and support, you should lose tenure. She would push to implement this system in NYC.

Question #3: What one thing would you do to improve school system?

Liu: Would hire more guidance counselors, so instead of 1 per 100 students.

Thompson: Moratorium on school closings.

Allon: No more standardized testing in 1^st through 5th grade (unfortunately there are federal and state mandates requiring testing in 3-5th grades); make foreign language mandatory in elementary schools and require at least two years classroom experience for all teachers.

De Blasio: fund Universal preK and more afterschool programs.

Quinn: stop vilifying teachers, tone down rhetoric, reduce test prep, intervene in struggling schools to get them help they need before closing.

Question #4:  Have schools gotten better or worse under Bloomberg?

De Blasio: Progress has “stalled”; we need “reset” and cannot continue status quo.

Allon: Schools slightly better, but we need to properly train teachers, need at least 3 years of clinical practice;

Liu: Not sure, some schools better, some worse, hard to measure; we need to reduce emphasis on high-stakes testing; stop co-locations and listen to parents more, make sure students really ready for college.

Thompson: Mayoral control has not worked; there’s been an excessive focus on test-taking.

Quinn: tThere’s been progress, but not enough; need to bring parents in real ways; too much test prep, should be more emphasis on college completion.

Question #5: Would you give charters free rent in public school buildings?

Quinn: I would not stop this practice, though all sides think current system is broken, including charter proponents. Process needs to be more “transparent.”

De Blasio: Opinions of parents ignored and system undemocratic; there needs to be more parent engagement, if there’s a bad plan should be changed.

Thompson: System of inequities, students at public school feel they're 2^nd class citizens; should be done differently, but not against charter co-locations per se.

Allon: Charters are public schools, principals should work together as they do in Brandeis building, which has four high schools, including Frank McCourt HS which he helped start.

Liu: Would call for moratorium on all school closings and co-locations; co-locations cause too much friction and  are destructive to educational process.

DeBlasio (in response to Allon); McCourt HS good example of harmful co-location; successful HS model whose growth was limited by incursion of charter school (Upper West Success).

Allon True, they originally wanted 800 seats for McCourt, but DOE limited enrollment to 400, DOE still stuck on small school model that Gates started but has now discredited.  Administrative costs for all these small schools are sky high, paying for principal/AP for every schools.  

Quinn: Lots of examples of principals working together well in co-located schools; we need to invest in more leadership training of principals.

Question: class size reduction is the top priority of parents; is it a priority of yours;  and if so, how would you pay for it ?

Liu: Yes, it’s a priority; but there are space issues; teachers are not fully utilized; we can afford to do this without spending a lot more money.

Allon:  Impossible to enact this citywide; he would prioritize 1^st and 2^nd grade; and in language and science instruction.

Thompson: Most important in K-3^rd grades; in other grades, could provide more time on task through extended day or Saturday school.

De Blasio: Parents want this intensely; we should fund it by doing away with all the consultants; reiterates support for preK.

Quinn:  Focus on class size in preK-3^rd  and ELA classes.  We might find savings in the contracts budget, to redirect to classroom but in order to implement we need long term capital planning to make sure there’s space; engage with Census and Dept of Health in this process.

Question: When mayoral control up for vote in 2015, would you go to Albany to change system or keep as is?

De Blasio:  We need to keep mayoral control but a more democratic version, including giving CEC’s a meaningful role in co-locations and closings like Community Boards have now(CBs also only have advisory powers). The PEP should be place of real debate instead of Kangaroo court.

Quinn:  We need municipal control, DOE treated like real city agency, under control of City Council and Mayor.  That way the Council could legislate, will full budgetary knowledge and authority and parents can go to Councilmember for help.  [Currently, DOE is NOT a city agency like any other but primarily under control of state legislature instead.]

Allon: Mayoral control “red herring” not important; we need right teachers in classroom.

Liu:  I supported mayoral control because I thought it meant accountability,  but we didn’t get that.  We need to modify so there is more accountability [but how he didn’t say].

Thompson: Doesn’t matter so much as long as there is a good mayor, he would “tweak” it and bring district Superintendents back as before.

Summary:

All of the candidates had their high points:  Liu came out most strongly vs. co-locations and school closings; and expressed the most skepticism about theunreliable teacher evaluation system.  Chris Quinn’s notion of municipal control would be a substantial improvement to our governance system, providing real checks and balances, if the Legislature would agree to give more power to the City Council.  Allon seemed to understand how flawed and expensive the small school initiative has been, though his understanding of some other areas seemed weak (testing and John White).  De Blasio was most emphatic that the governance system needs to be changed to become more democratic, and that the PEP must change as well, but put forward few specifics as to how this should be accomplished.  Thompson was clear about the need to have a moratorium on school closings and giving back authority to the district Superintendents, but was weak on charters and how to reform mayoral control.

In the end, they all were somewhat disappointing in similar ways: they all inveighed against the clear overemphasis on testing and test prep, but offered no concrete proposals on how to mitigate this, especially as many of these policies are now coming from state and federal level.  They all said that the system had to change so that parents would be “listened” to more, but none had specific proposals to institutionalize the parent voice.  All said class size was important but most would limit their efforts to smaller classes in the early grades, and none seemed to understand how many economic benefits and cost savings would come from this reform.  None seemed to realize how necessary class size reduction will be towards improving our schools, including for our middle and high students if the words “equity” and “college and career ready” are ever to become more than buzzwords.

Hopefully, as time goes on, all the candidates will start to develop a deeper understanding and more clearly defined policy positions over the six months.  In any case, it will be up to us as parents, educators and advocates to make sure that they do.

Public School Parents Voted Against Bloomberg

The NY Times has some interesting exit poll results. About 25% of voters told the Times they had children in public school. These parents went for Thompson 55% to 43% for Bloomberg.

Full results here.

NYC Kids PAC Endorses Bill Thompson

Over 200 public school parents and educators from all over the city braved icy rain on Sunday to cheer as NYC Kids PAC endorsed Bill Thompson for mayor. Kids PAC president Ann Kjellberg, Assemblymember Deborah Glick, and parent leaders Monica Major from the Bronx and Rich Wisniewski from Staten Island spoke about the real record of this administration—flat national test scores, overcrowded classrooms, and dictatorial policies that don't work—and our support for Thompson's policies and values. Alev Dervich, a teacher from PS 15 in Red Hook spoke about the administration's divisive policy of forcing privileged charter schools into neighborhood schools, and Luis Reyes spoke of their failure to improve outcomes for ELL and Special Ed students.

NYC Kids PAC was proud to have this opportunity to join hands with parents from the across the city and demand real improvements for our schools. Eight years of destructive, dictatorial educational policies are enough!

Visit www.nyckidspac.org to read our endorsement and Thompson's proposals for education, to join NYC Kids PAC, and to request materials to distribute in your neighborhood. There are only two weeks remaining in this election and parents must be heard!

NYC Kids PAC is a grassroots organization of parents working together to support elected officials who support our schools, with particular attention to their actual legislative and policy record in office. We are proud to endorse Bill Thompson for mayor and to call on NYC parents to vote Bloomberg out on the basis of his dismal record while reigning over our schools: his disdain for public school parents and his indifference to the issues that concern us the most.

See our press release about yesterday's event and this Daily News article.

Bill Thompson on charter schools and turning around failing schools

Working Families Party debate, July 2, 2009

“I do support charter schools, but they serve only about 25,000 students. That leaves more than one million who aren’t in charter schools.

.... When we look at what we did, a model called Chancellor’s schools; we capped the size of the school, created a rigorous curriculum, focused on teacher training, literacy, etc.. intensive teacher training and the schools improved. And we involved parents. We need to bring them in."

(He fails to mention the most important reform in the Chancellor's district -- a dramatic reduction in class size for grades K-5)

".... not everything is standardized tests. We must bring back art and music to schools and we create well-rounded students."

Chancellor Flees Staten Island Parent Meeting

According to press and eyewitness accounts, Chancellor Klein apparently "bolted" from a meeting with angry Staten Island parents. Here's the story in the Staten Island Advance.

A parent on the scene sent this report:

The Advance got the tone right but I want to add that parents (and teachers) at the forum were great—respectful and thoughtful but very angry.

Among the most salient points addressed were: 1) Class size, especially in Middle Schools continues to be insanely high; 2) Special Ed problems abound, including students who are getting exams not appropriate to their IEPs; 3) There are significant concerns about the implications of the new funding proposal both with respect to schools with senior teachers being penalized and funding being tied directly to students; 4) There are too many assessments, tests, and exams. Both teachers and students told Klein that needs to focus more on teaching and learning and less on constantly gathering data and information.

In an update to an earlier story, NYC Comptroller Bill Thompson added his voice to chorus of those criticizing the Mayor's record on education. Quoted in this NY Post article, Thompson suggests the State's graduation is the accurate one. See our post on this issue from earlier this week.

Update: Borough President Molinaro sent a letter to the SI Advance criticizing the conduct of those at the meeting. Parents responded with a slew of letters. Here's an excerpt from one:

Mr. Molinaro says he is ashamed by what took place. I am ashamed that I did not see Mr. Molinaro present at such an important forum. I am ashamed that Chancellor Joel Klein dodged, evaded, and dismissed the pressing questions and concerns of teachers and parents. …What occurred at this forum was an outcry from the people who are not being heard or served by these politicians.

If anyone has a link to BP Molinaro's letter, please send it in.